Historical significance of 78-0
Scoring 70 or more has only been done 22 times in Michigan history.
It was only the second time EVER that we scored 70 or more on the road.
Also was only the 4th time we did so in a B1G game.
Let's take a look-
| Date | Opponent | Result |
| 11/24/1888 | vs Albion | W 76-4 |
| 10/8/1892 | vs Michigan Athletic Association | W 74-0 |
| 11/18/1893 | vs Northwestern | W 72-6 |
| 10/26/1901 | vs Buffalo | W 128-0 |
| 11/23/1901 | vs Beloit | W 89-0 |
| 9/27/1902 | vs Albion | W 88-0 |
| 10/8/1902 | vs Michigan State | W 119-0 |
| 10/25/1902 | vs Ohio State | W 86-0 |
| 11/8/1902 | vs Iowa | W 107-0 |
| 10/8/1903 | vs Albion | W 76-0 |
| 10/10/1903 | vs Beloit | W 79-0 |
| 10/21/1903 | vs Ferris State | W 88-0 |
| 10/8/1904 | vs Kalamazoo | W 95-0 |
| 10/12/1904 | vs Physicians & Surgeons (Chi) | W 72-0 |
| 10/19/1904 | vs American Medical School (Chi) | W 72-0 |
| 10/22/1904 | vs West Virginia | W 130-0 |
| 10/25/1905 | vs Albion | W 70-0 |
| 11/25/1905 | vs Oberlin | W 75-0 |
| 10/21/1939 | at Chicago | W 85-0 |
| 9/25/1976 | vs Navy | W 70-14 |
| 11/7/1981 | vs Illinois | W 70-21 |
| 10/8/2016 | at Rutgers | W 78-0 |
October 12th, 2016 at 1:40 PM ^
you were on.
October 12th, 2016 at 9:58 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 12th, 2016 at 11:21 AM ^
but we scored another rushing TD since then. It's now 85-0.
October 12th, 2016 at 10:04 AM ^
In 1904, a touchdown was only worth 5 points. Also, that was the era of variable game lengths; per Wikipedia, the game vs. American Medical school had a 20 minute first half and a 3 1/2 minute second half. Even the WVU game was a total of 45 minutes (25 and 20), vs. the regulation 70 (at the time).
So, take the 130-0, adjust to modern scoring rules to get 152-0, and change to a 60-minute game to get 203-0. There's your target, Coach.
(Also, it says that Joe Curtis scored 6 touchdowns and kicked 19 extra points in that game as the left tackle. What say we get JBB some reps to spell Kenny Allen? :-)
October 12th, 2016 at 10:05 AM ^
October 12th, 2016 at 10:05 AM ^
I believe a lot of those scores came during the time frame when the person who scored got the ball back.
October 12th, 2016 at 10:06 AM ^
Rutgers vs 1903 Beloit would be a fuck of a game.
October 12th, 2016 at 3:45 PM ^
You're right, what with all the Beloit players being not only dead, but buried, Rutgers would have a fighting chance to have a fighting chance!
October 12th, 2016 at 10:08 AM ^
Yes yes yes. But it is fucking Rutgers who no one believes belongs in the Big Ten. I get it, we beat up a lot of teams in the early 20th century. Let's not make this anything more than it is, supremely gratifying to watch as it happened. But let's enjoy the gifs and move on. This was not an accomplishment in and of itself. It's just another step on the path.
October 12th, 2016 at 10:15 AM ^
dbl post
October 12th, 2016 at 10:14 AM ^
totally agree, its just Rutgers.
October 12th, 2016 at 10:19 AM ^
October 12th, 2016 at 10:33 AM ^
Rivalries require two. I see no reason to allow them to dictate the relationship, on or off the field, or between fans. Let them hate us, fine. I don't care. Enjoy the beatdown for what it is - putting them in place and reasserting our team's dominance. But to carry on and on and on about what this says for the program, where it places us in history etc is just ego masturbation. Keep your head on your shoulders, don't be a douche, and realize that just about everyone will hang 50+ on RU this year.
Bye weeks are awful. Go start planning for Wife's Day (TM). If you don't have one, go start planning on getting one.
October 12th, 2016 at 10:41 AM ^
We've scored 70 points 3 times since 1950. This is a pretty nice accomplishment. We didn't even hang 70 on Delaware State, Hawaii etc. Especially since we only scored 70+ on the road once.
If this was a game week, this wouldn't be a thread.
October 12th, 2016 at 11:15 AM ^
I get it. It's yet another bit of interesting info that shows just how great the win was. I truly do. But does anyone honestly think that we're going to break teams' spirits week in and week out? Because that is the reaction that's happening in this thread.
October 12th, 2016 at 1:42 PM ^
I expect this defense to break a lot of teams spirit left on the schedule. Did you see some of the post pressers from the PSU game? And PSU is doing not bad.
October 12th, 2016 at 3:26 PM ^
They had one good game against Minnesota--on the back of their RB who had a great game. I would submit that PSU is still bad.
October 12th, 2016 at 11:14 AM ^
October 12th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^
Then by all means, post snark on the internet. It just seems to me that there are better alternatives.
October 12th, 2016 at 11:28 AM ^
I thoroughly enjoy ego masturbation
October 12th, 2016 at 12:19 PM ^
October 12th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^
Only Ohio State and Michigan scored 50 points or more.
October 12th, 2016 at 3:25 PM ^
And yet, Rutgers was still considered to be bad at football.
October 12th, 2016 at 10:39 AM ^
They are just trying to start shit because they thought they owned us due to they beat us as their first BIG game. Or at least one fan posting on different sites is trying to start shit and stating they are hated rivals, when really they are not.
October 12th, 2016 at 3:47 PM ^
Exactly, as evidenced by all the not until we beat MSU, OSU and Rutgers jokes!
October 12th, 2016 at 10:42 AM ^
October 12th, 2016 at 11:12 AM ^
I said to enjoy it... but enjoy it for what it was. I think it is fair to say that some of the fanbase are treating like the win over Rutgers like we just won a national championship. (Yes, I know RU said it was a NC game). But as I said earlier, I don't think our expectations should be set by Rutgers. That relationship should be like the WSJ article... Oh, you. Hi.
October 12th, 2016 at 11:28 AM ^
October 12th, 2016 at 12:20 PM ^
It's a huge relief. The team looks absolutely phenomenal--even in games everyone outside of the school tends to harp about (Wisconsin). They look phenomenal. And so much better than anything we've seen for the last ten or so years.
October 12th, 2016 at 11:43 AM ^
I think it is fair to say that some of the fanbase are treating like the win over Rutgers like we just won a national championship.Look at that man over there. He's made entirely of straw!
October 12th, 2016 at 12:13 PM ^
Is the "straw man mic drop" the hip response to reasonable argument now? First, my comment does not create a hypothetical argument that I then attack. At worst, I may have engaged in a little hyperbole, but it was intended.
My comment that the response to the win was like we just won a national championship was designed to point out how over the top the response has been (comparing this year's teams to those from the early 20th century is over the top) -- so ridiculous that it is similar to Rutgers declaring that last week was a national championship game.
Link: Methinks you need to refresh yourself as to what a straw man argument is
October 12th, 2016 at 1:53 PM ^
When they lay a beating like that, I don't see the issue you have with people enjoying it. This is a bye week, and Michigan added to the record books. I felt similar when Denard had a huge start against Connecticut, only to surpass his crazy yardage against Notre Dame. Jake Butt breaking records, Mike Hart, Gallon, these are all records that are being broken for a team that has played a lot of seasons. Since the amount of games has increased per season, and the bowl games count, as well as freshman being allowed to play, a lot of the career records might not be as impressive. However, in this case, this is a game during the modern 85 scholarship era, where Michigan dominated a team so bad, they got hugs when they earned a first down.
Fans on a message board during a bye week talking about a historic beatdown, is not going to derail the season or the team.
October 12th, 2016 at 2:18 PM ^
I don't disagree with anything you've said. But I have to go back to my original point... It is just Rutgers. If we did this to a FCS team (which is exactly what Rutgers is) in week one or two, would we really be having this discussion?
Maybe this just is a bit of filling-the-bye-week void, but as much as I enjoyed how well we played--particularly the second and third string--I just cant take the kind of joy out of being an opponent who is so very, very, very bad that I see.
And I know that the fans aren't the team, nor am I advocating that fans have to keep the same mindset as the players. But that doesn't mean we can't keep things in perspective.
October 12th, 2016 at 2:47 PM ^
That's exactly what we're doing. All those FCS games and games against terrible FBS teams, and we've very rarely put up a performance like that. Seems like it's you who has lost perspective.
October 12th, 2016 at 3:23 PM ^
So in essence, you're content splitting hairs over how badly we've beaten this bad opponent over that bad opponent? I've ridiculed Sparty and Buckeye fans for less.
At some point, you just call bad, bad. Whether it is dumpster-fire bad, JV-bad, or just grossly-underperforming bad. At the end of the day, it is all bad, and the score doesn't matter.
If we put up 78 on OSU at the end of the year... that's a horse of a different color.
October 12th, 2016 at 3:30 PM ^
You're just completely missing the point. It's ok to appreciate a historic performance like the one just put on, regardless of how bad the opponent is, because quite frankly we've very rarely put a performance like this up against anyone. Why that irks you so much I have no idea.
If we beat OSU by 78, the basking will be a hell of a lot greater than this one thread.
October 12th, 2016 at 3:54 PM ^
This win was not historic. Perhaps it would have been historic if we beat GT's margin of victory over Cumberland. Hell, it wasn't even our own largest margin of victory. Going by WD's info above, this was our 11th greatest shutout victory. Who remembers any sports legend's 11th greatest achievement?
EDIT: And I will submit that the win the week before over Wisconsin, was a better win, even though the score was only 14-7.
October 12th, 2016 at 3:55 PM ^
It was the most points scored since WW2. I'd say that's pretty historic.
October 12th, 2016 at 4:04 PM ^
Ohio State put up 77 on Bowling Green earlier this year. Was that historic?
This is where our argument goes in circles, so I will have to respectfully disagree and leave it at that. Scoring a lot of points against a bad team doesn't qualify as a historic win, unless it happens to be the most lopsided score ever, or at least in school history. This was neither. This was the 11th best in our school history, and the most in a long time - over a very, very bad Rutgers team. The win the week before, against a real opponent was a better performance in my book.
October 12th, 2016 at 4:31 PM ^
Well who the hell else is beating them 78 to zip? Did the great undefeated no.2 team in the land do it at home? No, I think they fell 20 fucking points short of that. Did the great Washington team? No, I don't think so.
Did we score that many against Hawaii, UConn, Akron, App St., Eastern, or any of the other countless terrible teams we've played since 1939? We barely beat or lost to some of those teams in the last several years!
78 to 0 with no first downs until the 4th quarter, upon when they aquired HALF of their total on one play, negative yards for almost the whole game and a host of the other incredible stats all make it, YES, a historically noteworthy game.
You should be able to understand that and distinguish between the game and score and stats being something to talk about, and the game being proof or evidence of anything more than that we stomped a terrible team in amazing fashion, more amazing than the other top teams who stomped them, but not a sign that we are best team in the land or in history, or that it shows how high we rank in history or any other crap like that. Those things are TBD and will be judged on the whole season.
October 12th, 2016 at 4:30 PM ^
It certainly opened eyes. I don't know where that performance ranks in OSU history and I don't care. We know where the Rutgers performance ranks in Michigan history and I don't see why it's a crime to acknowledge it's place.
October 12th, 2016 at 4:37 PM ^
Which is very different than calling it an "historic" win.
October 12th, 2016 at 4:11 PM ^
Greatest margin of victory since 1939, the year of the Wizard of Oz, Gone With the Wiind, Goodbye, Mr. Chips, Dark Victory, Love Affair, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Ninotchka, Of Mice and Men, Stagecoach & Wuthering Heights! We've played an awful lot of tomato cans and cupcakes since then, an awful lot of awful teams without doing this to to them! How on earth do you not look in the record books and compare it with the other outrageous scores of the days of yore?
Nobody is saying this team is as great as the greatest teams in Michigan history, yet, because of this game or that score, they're just putting this score in the context of the other crazy scores. Most of those games were against unqualified teams also. So what?
October 12th, 2016 at 10:56 AM ^
Also probably looks just like his avatar. And the penalty for trespassing on his lawn is severe.
October 12th, 2016 at 11:10 AM ^
Indeed, I might invite you in, feed you, engage you with intersting conversation, spur you to think more deeply, and encourage you to be better.
October 12th, 2016 at 11:52 AM ^
At this point I'm just enjoying negging you. :) also, he probably looks closer to the current avatar than he did his previous avatar.
October 12th, 2016 at 12:02 PM ^
I can't be faulted for the new avatar. (really can't be faulted for taking a rather moderate position on this either, but by all means, neg away.)
October 12th, 2016 at 1:36 PM ^
October 12th, 2016 at 1:47 PM ^
Its just an informal negbang. Nothing to worry about. :)
October 12th, 2016 at 8:17 PM ^
I doubt there is anything you could teach me or convince me is interesting. Fashionable contrarians grind my gears pretty badly.